Results 1 to 9 of 9
February 21st, 2008, 07:32 AM #1
Google and medical history online
- Join Date
- May 31st, 2006
- Houston TX
Big brother will have all of your medical records.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google Inc. will begin storing the medical records of a few thousand people as it tests a long-awaited health service that's likely to raise more concerns about the volume of sensitive information entrusted to the Internet search leader.
The pilot project to be announced Thursday will involve 1,500 to 10,000 patients at the Cleveland Clinic who volunteered to an electronic transfer of their personal health records so they can be retrieved through Google's new service, which won't be open to the general public.
Each health profile, including information about ions, allergies and medical histories, will be protected by a password that's also required to use other Google services such as e-mail and personalized search tools.
Google views its expansion into health records management as a logical extension because its search engine already processes millions of requests from people trying to find about more information about an injury, illness or recommended treatment.
But the health venture also will provide more fodder for privacy watchdogs who believe Google already knows too much about the interests and habits of its users as its computers log their search requests and store their e-mail discussions.
Prodded by the criticism, Google last year introduced a new system that purges people's search records after 18 months. In a show of its privacy commitment, Google also successfully rebuffed the U.S. Justice Department's demand to examine millions of its users' search requests in a court battle two years ago.
The Mountain View-based company hasn't specified a timetable for unveiling the health service, which has been the source of much speculation for the past two years. Marissa Mayer, the Google executive overseeing the health project, has previously said the service would debut in 2008.
Contacted Wednesday, a Google spokesman declined to elaborate on its plans. The Associated Press learned about the pilot project from the Cleveland Clinic, a not-for-profit medical center founded 87 years ago.
The clinic already keeps the personal health records of more than 120,000 patients on its own online service called MyChart. Patients who transfer the information to Google would still be able to get the data quickly even if they were no longer being treated by the Cleveland Clinic.
"We believe patients should be able to easily access and manage their own health information," Mayer said in a statement supplied by the Cleveland Clinic.
The Cleveland Clinic decided to work with Google "to create a more efficient and effective national health care system," said C. Martin Harris, the medical center's chief information officer.
Google isn't the first high-tech heavyweight to set up an online filing cabinet in an effort make it easier for people to get their medical records after they change doctors or health insurance plans.
Rival Microsoft Corp. last year introduced a similar service called HealthVault, and AOL co-founder Steve Case is backing Revolution Health, which also offers online tools for managing personal health histories.
The third-party services are troublesome because they aren't covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPPA, said Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, which just issued a cautionary report on the topic.
Passed in 1996, HIPPA established strict standards that classify medical information as a privileged communication between a doctor and patient. Among other things, the law requires a doctor to notify a patient when subpoenaed for a medical record.
That means a patient who agrees to transfer medical records to an external health service run by Google or Microsoft could be unwittingly making it easier for the government or some other legal adversary to obtain the information, Dixon said.
If the medical records aren't protected by HIPPA, the information conceivably also could be used for marketing purposes.
Google, which runs the Internet's most lucrative ad network, typically bases its marketing messages on search requests and the content on Web pages and e-mail contained in its computers.
It's not clear how Google intends to make money from its health service. The company sometimes introduces new products without ads just to give people more reason to visit its Web site, betting the increased traffic will boost its profits in the long run.
February 21st, 2008, 08:02 AM #2
- Join Date
- January 18th, 2005
February 21st, 2008, 08:37 AM #3
Google is going a little far.
I wonder if this is what they had in mind when they started.
February 21st, 2008, 08:52 AM #4
February 21st, 2008, 08:54 AM #5
Very scary. I was at car insurance the other day and woman told me to give her my social in order to put it into computer (then noticed it was on the internet on some insurance database) so I can save a few hundred dollars per year. I told her 'no' that's ok, I'll pay the extra 10.00 per month difference.
Say no to everything requiring storing of your info, social, medical, etc even if they say it's just on their computer but not really they may be online and realistically their computer and word and excell and programs are usually online 24/7 via dsl nowadays, so don't trust you info with anyone.
February 21st, 2008, 09:33 AM #6Sky is falling...
This will help 99% of people and hurt 1%...
I volunteer for the 99% side and will take my chances..
February 21st, 2008, 09:33 AM #7
February 21st, 2008, 10:42 AM #8Originally Posted by Code Monkey
It's less than 1% that could ever be "helped" by this and a TREMENMDOUSLY HIGH 99.9% of people that will have their sensitive personal information available to any f**king idiot who can hack this database.
This is just a money-making scam to sell access of this information to the medical-industrial complex and line the golden google pockets with another layer of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
February 21st, 2008, 01:20 PM #9
"Dog Bites Monkey, Film at Eleven"
Sensitive medial data absolutely should not be held by any third party, especially Google. I don't give a damn what the reasoning is - my medical records are nobody's business but mine, my doctor's, and my insurance company's (and even then, the insurance company should have no access to anything other than what they were specifically billed for - if I am prescribed a medication, they should know the name of the medication, not the illness that it is being prescribed for).
Code Monkey - even if 1% get hurt (which is ludicrous, because you obviously have no idea what the risk really is), that's still a hell of a lot of people - over THREE MILLION if you're just counting the U.S. Are you seriously suggesting that a few million people are no big deal? This country went to war over three thousand people. Get a grip.Daniel M. Clark
Greg Hoffman Consulting
By JeethuThomas in forum Introduce YourselfReplies: 2Last Post: March 12th, 2013, 08:45 AM
By Google Affiliate Network Moderator in forum Google Affiliate Network - GANReplies: 0Last Post: December 18th, 2009, 10:42 AM
By Merchant Consultant Team in forum Search Engine OptimizationReplies: 0Last Post: April 20th, 2007, 09:09 AM